Patna High Court
Sushil Pandey @ Sushil Kumar Pandey @ Nishant Kr. PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to cash bond, sureties and conditions of appearance and non‑tampering.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Pandey, was charged under Sections 20(B)/(ii)B and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act for alleged possession of 1.9 kg of ganja. He had earlier been granted anticipatory bail, but the bail bonds could not be accepted due to a mismatch in his criminal antecedents. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, that the seized quantity was below commercial quantity, and that the provisions of Sections 37, 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act were not applicable. The State opposed the bail. The Court, considering the low quantity of contraband and the period of custody, granted bail subject to a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance and non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in an NDPS case where the seized narcotic quantity is below commercial quantity.
- Whether the petitioner’s criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
- Whether the provisions of Sections 37, 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act are attracted in the present facts.
Legislation cited
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 20(B)/(ii)B, 22(b), 37, 42, 50
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- narcotics
- commercial quantity
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2426 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Sushil Pandey @ Sushil Kumar Pandey @ Nishant Kr. Pandey S/o- Kamlesh
Pandey R/v- Nagri Ps- Charpokhri Dist-Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Santosh Pandey, Advocate
Mr. Mayank Raj, Advocate
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ramakant Sharma, learned senior counsel
for the petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDSL
Case No. 7 of 2025 arising out of Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 56
of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 20(B)/(ii)B,
22(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that 1.900 kilogram of
ganja has been recovered in this case.
4. Earlier, vide order dated 13.08.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 32661 of 2025 the petitioner was granted anticipatory
bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, subject to the condition
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2426 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
that the Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the
petitioner before acceptance of bail bonds. However, due to the
mismatch in the criminal antecedents, the bail bonds of the
petitioner could not be accepted.
5. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present
case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Petitioner is
in custody since 06.12.2025 and has four criminal antecedents.
There is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against
the petitioner. No incriminating material has been recovered
from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner has
no concern with the alleged recovery. The recovered contraband
is below commercial quantity, and hence, Section 37 of the
N.D.P.S. Act is not applicable in the present case. There is no
compliance of Sections 42 and 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, recovered contraband being less than the
commercial quantity as also the period of custody undergone by
the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2426 of 2026(2) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with NDSL Case No. 7 of
2025 arising out of Charpokhari P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025,
subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the petitioner.
(III) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…